New Pittsburgh Courier from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania • Page 6

PACE 6 THE NEW COURIER MAY 27, 197 MTIOML EDITORIALS Dr. King's Inherent Rights A' iV.vtfivlv By Diggs Dal root To CooYThe Recent defenders of Dr. Martin Luther King maintain his right to an opinion on Vietnam. Dr. King has been propelled into a controversy of unprece.

dented proportions since he switched his emphasis from civil rights to the unfortunate conflict in far off, Asia. This newspaper has been critical of Martin Luther King on his stand. As we said immediately after his now famous speech, we believe it to be a tragic mistake. We do not agree that because Dr. King was the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize that he has been handed a mandate to speak out on the war.

We also do not agree that funds presently flowing into the coutry's war chest would automatically be used for domestic programs. Anyone would agree that the billions of dollars being poured into the defense budget could work wonders with the eradication of poverty and disease in this coutry. What strides could be achieved for the Great Society program if only a small percentage was passed into the meaningful programs proposed by the administration. Yet, under the most normal of conditions, Congress would not support such expenditures at home. And certainly under its present mood, any such proposals would be due for rocky sailings.

The issue with Dr. King, therefore, is not the Tightness or wrongness of his position, nor is it whether or not the man is sincere. The issue is the impact of his stand on the country and the people whom he leads. Dr. King has been for a number of years, the great spiritual leader of the civil rights movement.

His gift of oratory has moved men to progressive action as no other single person. Because of this exalted position, his every word and action carries great and tremendous implications. And when Dr. King mounts the rostrum with the flag and draft card burners and charges that he will advise young Negroes to defy the draft, he is identified in this vein. Leaving the platform during the peace rally outside the United Nations before the more radical and ragtai1 element mounted it, does not ext'afp him from their wild and irresponsible preachments.

His image is meshed with the total picture. Of course Dr. King has a right to speak on diverse issues. He is an American and a loyal American. At the same time, however, he must be mindfuj of his great responsibility to the central cause of civil rights.

For as he has grown as the singular spokesman and personality in this all important field, he has lost some of the rights inherent in the lives of lesser Americans. We are critical of Dr. King for just' this. Did he not ask himself the question: Can I speak on this separate issue without seriously damaging the civil rights issue? We are willing to concede that he did not. Yet, Dr.

King is pictured on national television casting as. persions on his contemporaries by denouncing their liaison with the White House. Surely Martin Luther King is not suggesting that visits by Whitney Young, Roy Wilkins, the Negro publishers and others to the inner chambers of the White House, is tantamount to a "sell out." For far too many years, Negroes lacked access to the office of the president and frustrated leaders were battering futilely at the door. In earlier days, A. Philip Randolph and company got in to see President Roosevelt only because the threat of a March on Washington hung over the nation's capital.

In later years, President Eisenhower brought the first Negro in as a professional worker. The late President Kennedy upgraded the status of minorities at the executive mansion and President Johnson constantly seeks the advice and counsel of Negro leaders of all descriptions. Would Dr. King have Negroes turn down this excellent opportunity for Negroes to make known their aspirations through direct dialogue at the seat of the nation's government? If he does not, he erred in suggesting as much. Our criticism of Dr.

King is specifically because he has mixed the matter of civil rights with the complex and confusing issue of foreign policy. And in so doing, he has caused some damage to the former, where the issue is so clear against the fuzziness of the latter. Cassius Clay's Case The speed with which Cassius Clay was stripped of his world heavyweight title even before he was indicted by a federal grand jury, leaves no doubt that the World Boxing Association and the New York Boxing Commission were eager and glad to find an occasion to lift the crown from the brow of boxing's most colorful, and clean fighter since Joe Louis' days. Few sports writers have come to Clay's defense. But news commentators in general have shown much restraint in their criticism.

Clay's case rests on grounds that have not been considered with adequacy or impartial logic. He applied for conscientious objector status, then for exemption as a minister of religion. Both applications were rejected for reasons that the draft boards have never aired in public. Having been denied the status fie sought, Clay then challenged th Selective Service system on the ground that Negroes are inadequately represented on draft Doards. While the federal' courts paid no attention to his plea, President Johnson has taken note of his criticism.

He has ordered the selective Service to insure a more squitable ratio of Negro represen ation on draft boards. Conscientious objection to nilitary service is a tradition that las been accepted as a normal as lect of the democratic process. nd ministers of all faiths have een given automatic dispensation fom military service. For reasons seem to partake more of the lature of political and emotional judgment than sober, judicial rationalization, the courts have sustained the Selective system on all of these issues. Clay, or Muhammad Ali as he wishes to be called, and an increasing number of young men believe that the war in Vietnam is unjust.

They have the option of going to jail in behalf of their moral convictions. Clay is willing to pay the price. Viewed from the point of morality and personal conscience, the choice is scarcely different from that faced by civil rights activists in their demonstrations against unjust laws upholding racial segregation. Leaving aside Clay's objection to the war in Vietnam, a question on which there is ground for honest dissent, it cannot be contested that he lifted boxing out of the muck and grime of underworld traffic. He brought respectability and restored public confidence to a sport that was fast falling into disfavor.

Obviously boxing organizations don't want fighters with clean reputation and high moral character. Sidney J. Harris, the popular Chicago Daily News columnist, made this observation: "A man does not win the world's title because he is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, brave, clean and reverent, but because he is the best boxer in his class. And he loses the title only when he ceases to be the best boxer. "Stripping him (Clay) of his title because he is presumably 'unpatriotic' is as absurd and as unjust as sitting down to play poker with a man who wins a thousand dollars and then refusing to pay him what he has won because he failed to stand up while the National Anthem was being sung." VIEW Pres.

Johnson And 1968 By DR. BENJAMIN E. MAYS There is much talk about the unpopularity of the President. He is greatly criticized for the way the war is being conducted. The Republicans and the Democrats are behind him.

The war in Vietnam will be an issue of the 1968 campaign. Some say Johnson should order the American troops home. Others argue we should escalate the war, use the atomic and hydrogen bombs on Hanoi and end the war in the shortest possible time. There are others who want the war escalated but no use of atomic and hydrogen bombs. We may not like the way the war is being conducted.

On the other hand, I do hot see how any. one else would do any better. biiwimnlJ ill Governor Romney doesn't like what is going on in South Vietnam but he ended up pretty close to Johnson's position when he spoke at Morehouse May 1, 1967. We are in a terrible predicament and nobody knows exactly what to do about the war. I do not believe we can win it.

We didn't win in Korea and the war in Vietnam may have to be settled as the Korean War was settled. Whether a Republican or a Democratic president, the criticisms on the conduct of the war would be just about the same. If this were election year, I would vote for Johnson again; not because of the way he is carrying on the war but because another president would hardly do any bet ter and because of what he has done in the Civil Rights struggle. I have heard recently many Negroes say that they do not plan to vote for Johnson next year. This I cannot understand.

President Johnson caused to be passed more Civil Rights Legislation than any other president in American history more than Lincoln. I take nothing from Lincoln but Lincoln did not fight the war to emancipate the slaves. The emancipation of the slaves, was a measure of expediency. If Lincoln could have saved the Union without freeing the slaves, I believe he would hardly have tampered with slavery. He freed the slaves in those sections of the United States which were in rebellion against the United States.

Some have doubted Johnson's sincerity. If Johnson was not sincere in his Civil Rights battles, he could have done far less and still been ahead of all other presidents in the area of Civil Rights. So far as Negroes are concerned, they should not forget Johnson and Humphrey in 1968. Many southerners hate Johnson mainly because of his stand on Civil Rights just as many rich people hated Franklin D. Roosevelt because of his New Deal philosophy.

Johnson is disliked because southerners fell Johnson should know better than to go so far out on Civil Rights Johnson may not be too popular now but 1968 is a long way off politically. The Republicans may come through with a strong candidate, a Romney or a Rockefeller. If this turns out to be the case, Johnson and Humphrey may have a tough campaign ahead, especially if they make no promises to end the war. Letters To The Editor Dear Editor: It is a crusader's task to stir the people. Dr.

King is a fearless and dedicated crusader for right. However I consider him to be too young to be entirely wise and I don't believe he knows the lower class Negro. Mr. Car michael is also young and seemingly with less Christian consciousness. These men and others are crying out for leaders to show them the way, now, to show us all what to do in the ever present need of the poor members of their race.

We are supposed to be a Democracy, where each man must earn his income or suffer. Most of those who are suffering did not prepare themselves to earn or were allowed or forced by their parents to stay out of the schools which were provided fon. them. In Chicago and other northern cities today there are Negro children who lire apparently permitted to play in the down town district all day when they should be in school, and they make a habit of it. And some of these young boys are spending currency.

It is not all economic, this want of the Negroes on Relief. It is partly a desire on their part to be kept. When Negroes in America were slaves they had to work but they didn't have to worry about preparing to earn for they knew they would be kept. The feeling has lingered and been passed on. Poor people should expect to live in poor houses and many of them make the houses poor.

I believe that for every evil under the sun there is a rea son, and if there is a cause, there should also be a remedy, if the cause is known. MRS. G. M. HOUGHTON CHICAGO, ILLINOIS Dear Editor: I read in your article of last week's paper about W.E.B.DuBois.

You listed a number of the old DuBois associates. The one I am interested in is Charles H. Wesley. The reason I would like to get in touch with this man is I am making a study on Negro History. I am having the hardest time trying to locate certain books.

If you could please tell me where I could get in touch with him, I would greatly appreciate iL The name of the book is History Of The Negro Race In America" from 1619 1880 WASHINGTON Clarence Mitchell, the cagey, veteran lobbyist for the NAACP, is the one who opened the lid on one of D.C.'s worst kept secrets last week. It happened during congressional hearings on a bill to give "cease and desist" powers to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Mitchell, in a display of anger, said that he had heard that the chairman of EEOC, Stephen Shulman was going to resign. He wondered out loud how the fair job agency could do the job it was designed for with constant turnover. There are official denials that Shulman is resigning.

The official view is that Shulman was appointed to fill the unexpired term held by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr. It ruus out at midnight, July 1, 1967. Shulman, it is believed is headed for a lucrative job in a big N.Y. law firm and isn't seeking reappointment.

CURRENT T4LK IS that the President had to literally beg Shulman to take the spot in the first place with the agreement that he could step down after one year. It goes without saying that the Civil Rights groups are disurbed by the coustan reorganization at EEOC. As individuals, many of tKm, including Mitchell, are hoping mad because of an interview Shulman gave to the Wall Street Journal in which he stated that employment was too important to be lefi to the civil rights groups. The retort is: How did the rhrirman think the Commission and all the other programs got started in the first place; From the pressure of civil groups. As far as the Commission goes, the rights leadership hopes that some balance, continuity and stability be obtained when the new chairman is selected.

Rumor has it that Shulman will stay until a successor is named DR. J. SAUNDERS REDDING, regarded as one of the. finest Negro literary technicians, has given np his professorship at Hampton Institute. On leave from Hampton, Dr.

Redding is director of the Division of Research and Publication for the National Fonndation on the Arts and Humanities. He indicated that he Is displeased with the Hampton leadership, which means Jerome Brad Holland, current prexy The name of Thnrgood Marshall looms bigger and bigger as the probable Supreme Court choice to replace retiring Justice Tom Clark. Marshall is doing his usual tremendous job as solicitor general of the U.S. and has been making a number of appearances before the city clubs a round the nation, which is the usual prelude to acquiring a responsible post. It is remembered that when Time ran i cover story on Thnrgood several years ago, it described him as a "good constitutional lawyer." ODDS 'N' ENDS: Among the top travelers in government is Shelton B.

Granger, deputy assistant secretary, HEW. He jets to Switzerland, to Hawaii, back to New York City in a span of a month on business for the international education program, which he heads. Granger is the nephew of Lester Granger, former Urban League executive Another globe hopping government executive is George L. P. Weaver, assistant secretary for international affairs in the labor dept.

Almost anytime you're in town and call George his secretary will inform you that "Mr. Weaver is out of the country." Hubert Pair, one of the oldest staff members of the corporation counsel's office in point of service, has been elevated to chief assistant corporation counsel of D.C. The corporation counsel is Charles T. Duncan, son of famed singer, Todd Duncan, who teaches music in the District. THINKS TO NATIONAL HOTLINE the Small Business Administration is loosening the purse string on a number of Negro business proposals.

A Washington group has been tossed a bundle to build a shopping center Folks close to Sterling Tucker say that he is not interested in the $22, 000 UPO job vacated by James Banks. Tucker, his friends claimed, is coining better than $35,000 a year with his Washington Urban League post and his consultant services to the federal government and private industry. It appears now that if Rev. Walter Fauntroy wants the job he can have it. UPO the organization that handles anti poverty programs in D.C.

Down in Texas, state senators passed a bill which would penalize renters or landlords who give each other bad checks. The measure would make it a misdemeanor to pay rent with a worthless check or stop payment on a rent check. Wow! SEVERAL WEEKS AGO National Hotline reported: Lionel Newsome has documentary information that there is a plan afoot to create trouble on 25 Negro college campuses this year. Since that time there has been eruptions at Howard, Fisk, Tennessee State, Lincoln (Mo.) and now Texas Southern at Houston Speaking of Houston: When an 11 year old lad drowned there last week in a scummy pond, the city retaliated by filling it in with garbage and dirt. This, after councilmen scored the "don't care attitude" of the administration Junius Griffin, director of public relations for the minorities division of the Republican National Committee, told a GOP seminar at Arlington, last week: "Negro publications are put into position of either supporting or knocking so called Negro leaders who are either self appointed, or appointed to leadership position by the white press." THE HOTTEST SEAT in the nation is the one held by Dr.

James Nabrit of Howard univeristy. The natural hair do crowd led by their sociology professor has the campus in a state of unrest. Since they booed Gen. Lewis Hershey, the Selective Service chief, off the platform, the insurrectionists have grown to such proportions that either they will run the school or Dr. Nabrit will.

Nabrit, who is cod at handling hot potatoes, will undoubtedly survive. But not without bitterness. His dilemma: Congress which handles the HU purse strings is calling for him to stamp out the black revolutionists, while the black revolutionists are calling him a "Tom" and the rest of the traditional uncomplimentary names. Overlooked is the fact that Nabrit was In the civil rights long before the black revolutionists were a gleam in their parents' eyes. Not only that, it was Nabrit and that was responsible for launching the legal fight (when it wasn't so popular) that has given the Negro the opportunity to sound off.

TA Students Boycott, Back White Instructor COLUMBIA, S.C. (UPI) Most of the 950 students at predominantly Negro Allen University boycotted classes in support of a white dean of faculty, who resigned in a dispute with college trustees. About 300 students gathered in a drizzle during the morning in a protest demonstration in front of the home of College President B. J. Glover carrying signs reading "We Demand in two volumes if you can tell me where I can find it.

CLEMENT O. LETT Quality Education" and "We Need Our Dean." The Dean, V. Dewey Annakin a retired professor from Indiana State University, appeared for a moment on the front porch of the president's home and received wild cheers. Annakin recommended that several professors at the private college not have their contracts renewed, but was overrulled by trustees. He resigned and said he felt he could no longer make a contribution to the school..